At some point change in the initial force cannot be maintained. The elongation of light waves in space diminishes intensity. A gamma wave could theoretically be stretched to it's limits over a billion years and be seen by us as a blip. A spherical wave is still constrained by gravity as such it is under the auspicious of the strength of that particular gravitational force. Is the cause for the elongation of light waves a product of its strength at the time of release eg: super nova, the gravitational force restraining it, or the pull of an expanding Universe? lol

Ok, let’s talk about an expanding spherical wave of light energy, such as the light emitted spherically from an energetic source like a super nova.

Assuming space meets the definition of an interstellar medium (ISM) like in our definition of space in reply #42, at some distant point in space, an observer would see the super nova as a mere blip, as you suggested.

1) Do you think that there is some distance beyond that at which the blip of light will fade in intensity to the point that there is no visible energy left in the wave front for an observer to see?

2) Do you think that there is some distance beyond that where there is no energy left at all in the wave front, i.e., where the expanding wave front of energy is diminished to zero, meaning that the wave energy is completely absorbed by the composition of the interstellar medium?

Then, for talking purposes, let’s assume that the spherical light wave is advancing into otherwise empty space, no ISM at all. In that case let’s ask a question:

3) Do you think that there is some distance beyond which there is no energy left at all in the wave front, i.e., where the energy is diminished to zero, meaning that the wave energy is not conserved?

guest46746

1) Do you think that there is some distance beyond that at which the blip of light will fade in intensity to the point that there is no visible energy left in the wave front for an observer to see?

Light travels at the speed of light in a vacuum, or if it is contained via black hole gravity or via human experimentation then it's speed is altered. An altered velocity indicates light's life cycle duration is like anything else in nature. Some light photons may last to 10 to the 18th power but some may not last half that time. Our estimate of the age of the Universe is 14 billions years, that is minute in comparison to 10 to the 18th power. Photons do and can decay into lighter particles.

#1 yes

2) Do you think that there is some distance beyond that where there is no energy left at all in the wave front, i.e., where the expanding wave front of energy is diminished to zero, meaning that the wave energy is completely absorbed by the composition of the interstellar medium?Then, for talking purposes, let’s assume that the spherical light wave is advancing into otherwise empty space, no ISM at all.

Light is observable as a reflection to a barrier if there is nothing to reflect it, it's presence is obscure. Do i believe that a wave front loses its integrity via a lack of mass? lol.My previous example to you however in regards to light elongation was for a gamma ray which is more of a highly concentrated beam of light. Being such, it's origin is not spherical but Birkeland current like. Gamma rays in this notable form, originate from the center of galaxies, is their observable, visible mass finite? Yes, they appears to be. Does this preclude that their energy dissipates without their mass husk? No, but their mass husk are traveling at approx. the speed of light. We do know that neutrino proceed gamma ray burst. What relation is there between lighter particles neutrinos acceleration and photons traveling at the speed of light? Decaying photons! lol. Decaying photons releasing into neutrinos lift the speed of light limits for neutrinos! lol. So, photonic mass is containable by gravity, neutrinos are not. I do believe that dark matter membranes are impervious even for neutrinos. I do believe that the Universe's background radiation is a reflection of this condition of recycled containment? Do I believe it is possible to expand without containment? No. I believe growth to be cellular process even for Universe. Does Universe growth require division? Multi-Universe theorist may believe so! lol

#2 yes

In that case let’s ask a question:3) Do you think that there is some distance beyond which there is no energy left at all in the wave front, i.e., where the energy is diminished to zero, meaning that the wave energy is not conserved?

To have a light wave traveling at the speed of light you need photonic energy. Neutrinos do meet this criteria. Light decays into lighter particles, neutrinos. Wave energy as I believe you are defining it, is not conserved. Containment in the form background radiation is. lol

Does energy exist without a structure to produce it? No. So, sub-elementary that have no structure are incapable of producing or sustaining energy production. An analogy would be amino acids, they are the building blocks of life but without DNA structure they are just amino acids. lol

#3 yes, decayed photons, neutrinos, do not possess the structure necessary to produce energy, so the potential without structure is 0. lol

Light travels at the speed of light in a vacuum, or if it is contained via black hole gravity or via human experimentation then it's speed is altered. An altered velocity indicates light's life cycle duration is like anything else in nature. Some light photons may last to 10 to the 18th power but some may not last half that time. Our estimate of the age of the Universe is 14 billions years, that is minute in comparison to 10 to the 18th power. Photons do and can decay into lighter particles.

#1 yes

Light is observable as a reflection to a barrier if there is nothing to reflect it, it's presence is obscure. Do i believe that a wave front loses its integrity via a lack of mass? lol.My previous example to you however in regards to light elongation was for a gamma ray which is more of a highly concentrated beam of light. Being such, it's origin is not spherical but Birkeland current like. Gamma rays in this notable form, originate from the center of galaxies, is their observable, visible mass finite? Yes, they appears to be. Does this preclude that their energy dissipates without their mass husk? No, but their mass husk are traveling at approx. the speed of light. We do know that neutrino proceed gamma ray burst. What relation is there between lighter particles neutrinos acceleration and photons traveling at the speed of light? Decaying photons! lol. Decaying photons releasing into neutrinos lift the speed of light limits for neutrinos! lol. So, photonic mass is containable by gravity, neutrinos are not. I do believe that dark matter membranes are impervious even for neutrinos. I do believe that the Universe's background radiation is a reflection of this condition of recycled containment? Do I believe it is possible to expand without containment? No. I believe growth to be cellular process even for Universe. Does Universe growth require division? Multi-Universe theorist may believe so! lol

#2 yes

To have a light wave traveling at the speed of light you need photonic energy. Neutrinos do meet this criteria. Light decays into lighter particles, neutrinos. Wave energy as I believe you are defining it, is not conserved. Containment in the form background radiation is. lol

Does energy exist without a structure to produce it? No. So, sub-elementary that have no structure are incapable of producing or sustaining energy production. An analogy would be amino acids, they are the building blocks of life but without DNA structure they are just amino acids. lol

#3 yes

, decayed photons, neutrinos, do not possess the structure necessary to produce energy, so the potential without structure is 0. lol

1) That just seems like an imponderable to me, lol. Does your estimate of the age of the universe track back only 14 billion years to the Big Bang, or could the universe have always existed, and could space be infinite, and therefore could the occurrence of Big Bang events be commonplace:

... caused by the intersection of two or more expanding parent big bang arenas in the infinite and eternal landscape of the greater universe; a multiple big bang event landscape? Yes or no? Yes.

2) I’m cautious about taking all of that at face value, and would be comfortable if we boil it down to say that there is known science, and there is “as yet” unknown science. But there is one thing we should be able to agree on and that is that light waves and gravitational waves carry energy across space. Yes or no? Yes.

3) Ok, question three was asked along with the premise that the light energy was expanding into empty space, which at best is a cheap thought experiment if we go with the definition of space in reply #42. Based on your answer, I’m willing to say the thought experiment was a failure, so lets forget #3 to save bandwidth.

Let’s boil all of that down to the premise that in the medium of space, wave energy (light energy and gravitational wave energy) is emitted and absorbed by particles and objects, and is thus conserved, and in the space between particles and objects, there is wave energy (light and gravitational waves) traversing space, based on a potentially infinite history of emission and absorption? Space is therefore filled with wave energy coming and going, to and from all directions, . Yes or no? Yes.

I guess none of that really gets to the original issue you brought up, which is … that you take exception to the idea that two wave fronts, whether light or gravitational, would form a peak of high energy at the point of intersection, and that peak would be surrounded by a valley of lower energy density.

I don’t know if we will resolve the issue between us, but describing the nature of a spherical light wave front, might be in order. I’ll go first, lol.

Would you accept the definition that a spherical wave front, as it advances, is marked by a wave energy density differential between the energy of the advancing wave front, and the energy of the space into which the front is expanding?

Further, when a wave front encounters another wave front, does the idea that there would be a momentary interruption in the advance of the two wave fronts, and a resulting disturbance in space at the point where the energy of the two wave fronts merge, and that disturbance would be resolved by the formation of a “third wave” that disburses the energy disturbance spherically?

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/gallery/43933_21_10_17_4_48_15.jpegIf you have studied the theory of light, Christian Huygens, this is from Reply #130 from the thread, “If there was one big bang event, why not multiple big bang events?”“We are talking Huygens 17th century, and Fresnel and Kirchhoff from the 19th century. Huygens theorized that each point on a propagating wave front could be characterized as a new spherical wave. He called them secondary spherical “wavelets”, which are quite like the “third waves” in the ISU model.”

guest46746

The structure of the Universe as represented in pictorial form, appear as a lattice of lights separated by areas/boundaries of obscure space. What is portrayed is Light separated. If light at one time was completely homogenous, a conclusion can be made that the dark obscure areas are separating light. The question then becomes the purpose or result of/for the separation. lol

A bubble structure is conducive to separation and breaking apart. A wave front consisting of such a bubble structure is susceptible to separation. lol

The propagation of light and gravity waves across the medium of space will continue to be a subject that I think is intimately related to quantum gravity.

Working from my reading of the executive summary of the arxiv, and the neutrino background discussion in your provided links, I have some comments:

I expect the presence of neutrinos coming and going in all directions in space, produced by a potentially eternal history of multiple big bang events across potentially infinite space. Future experiments will broaden the neutrino detection methods and data, and the data from CMB lensing is an exciting area in the research that will be forthcoming in the next decade. The number of neutrinos detected as those results come in will be valuable data that has the potential to reshape the standard model of particle physics, and the source of mass in the observable universe, to be sure.

In line with that point, note that in my last post I asked a question intended to address the idea of the infinites of space and time, and have not seen your response:“Does your estimate of the age of the universe track back only 14 billion years to the Big Bang, or could the universe have always existed, and could space be infinite, and therefore could the occurrence of Big Bang events be commonplace?”

My answer is “yes” to the infinites of space, time, and wave energy, and the image of two expanding/overlapping big bang arena waves in my last post, showing the convergence of galactic material and energy in the overlap space, portrays the idea of an infinite and eternal big bang arena action process that governs the macro nature of universe and gravity. It comes from the idea that there was no beginning; the universe could potentially have always existed. If so, there would be a perpetual history of big bang events. It is certainly clear, given that scenario, that there would have always been a constant source of neutrinos from the on-going big bang arena action across the landscape of the greater universe. Therefore, the new means of detecting neutrinos, and the broad sky surveys using those means, will surely show a higher concentration of neutrinos than is currently predicted, in my opinion. Please comment freely.

The structure of the Universe as represented in pictorial form, appear as a lattice of lights separated by areas/boundaries of obscure space. What is portrayed is Light separated. If light at one time was completely homogenous, a conclusion can be made that the dark obscure areas are separating light. The question then becomes the purpose or result of/for the separation. lol

A bubble structure is conducive to separation and breaking apart. A wave front consisting of such a bubble structure is susceptible to separation. lol

This thread has addressed various aspects of quantum field theory and the associated discussion of the false vacuum, nucleating bubbles, bubble collisions, virtual particles, pairs and annihilations, and the standard model of particle physics. The goal of the thread was to discuss what they are saying about quantum gravity, without discussing ideas that would be misleading to people coming here for established science. However, with the thread being moved to New Theories, that means the discussion can take on a more speculative nature.

So feel free to comment on the multiple big bang arena landscape, and the effects that a perpetual history of big bangs across all space would have on the presence of neutrinos, as well as your views on the three infinites of space, time, and energy.

guest46746

Bogie, agreement on matters is never necessary. Please allow me to explain my approach. Quantum and Mathematics are very different endeavours. Quantum deals with infinte possibilities, Mathematics is functional probablities, Quantum rules provides a means to explain what Mathematic functions cannot. Some may offer a Mathematical formula that is entirely valid, meaning it works out to having a true value. However; having a true value is not always indicative of of the right answer/solution to the problem, meaning it is a dead end. Quantum has the same issue, its use may apply rules that meet a conclusion but that conclusion may not be optimum, rendering it inconclusive. Both become an artful science of using the process of elimination towards the ultimate goal.

What is necessary, is the initiation of such processes. Some may be dead ends but others may bear fruit. We don't always know which is which. But in initiating the process, we are opening an exploration into functional probabilities and the deeper possibilities, that is the process of greater learning. Learning must always be a sharing experience or it becomes inconsequentially lost. Nobody can claim 100% certainty, so we all should be open to examination. It is often examination that produces the most refined product. I believe we all a share a sense about what rings true in regards to both probabilities and possibilities. It is a collective reasoning imbued in the human spirit, as such it has powered our innate capacities. It pushes us to push beyond our current abilities, in doing so it promotes common interest into a better future.

I have as probably many here have questioned the possibility of multi Universe formations. Such things cannot be discounted as current observations only add to our knowledge. What i had not contemplated prior was using neutrino trajectories to confirm or discount the multi-Universe theory. If neutrinos trajectories are shown to come from regions of space that have no known sources of light, then yes, i believe we must entertain and explore the possibility that such a scenario exist. lol

Bogie, agreement on matters is never necessary. Please allow me to explain my approach. Quantum and Mathematics are very different endeavours. Quantum deals with infinte possibilities, Mathematics is functional probablities, Quantum rules provides a means to explain what Mathematic functions cannot. Some may offer a Mathematical formula that is entirely valid, meaning it works out to having a true value. However; having a true value is not always indicative of of the right answer/solution to the problem, meaning it is a dead end. Quantum has the same issue, its use may apply rules that meet a conclusion but that conclusion may not be optimum, rendering it inconclusive. Both become an artful science of using the process of elimination towards the ultimate goal.

What is necessary, is the initiation of such processes. Some may be dead ends but others may bear fruit. We don't always know which is which. But in initiating the process, we are opening an exploration into functional probabilities and the deeper possibilities, that is the process of greater learning. Learning must always be a sharing experience or it becomes inconsequentially lost. Nobody can claim 100% certainty, so we all should be open to examination. It is often examination that produces the most refined product. I believe we all a share a sense about what rings true in regards to both probabilities and possibilities. It is a collective reasoning imbued in the human spirit, as such it has powered our innate capacities. It pushes us to push beyond our current abilities, in doing so it promotes common interest into a better future.

I have as probably many here have questioned the possibility of multi Universe formations. Such things cannot be discounted as current observations only add to our knowledge. What i had not contemplated prior was using neutrino trajectories to confirm or discount the multi-Universe theory. If neutrinos trajectories are shown to come from regions of space that have no known sources of light, then yes, i believe we must entertain and explore the possibility that such a scenario exist. lol

Regards

I acknowledge that all of what you say is reasonable and responsible, though we have different primary positions, meaning that my approach is that the wave-particle makes it reasonable to reconsider a more objective reality, at the expense of the purely random and spooky action, lol.

It is true that a general agreement on the various matters that have been brought up is not likely, but I think you know that TheNakedScientists have the “lighter side” sub-forums where rules permit us to bring up and discuss the more speculative or hypothetical. The reason we are now in New Theories is that we were straying from the mainstream consensus answers that are fit for enthusiastic youths, and others who are interested in learning the basics, and the New Theories sub-forum is the place where speculation is put up, and is open for discussion.

To recap:

1) We suggested that a good place to start the topic of quantum gravity was to examine virtual particles; we are, and that is still open for comments and discussion.

2) Based on interference patterns related to virtual particle disturbances, we have offered a speculative solution to the “mystery” of the two-slit, single particle experiments by proposing a structure for wave-particles composed of a core of high energy density spots (also described), surrounded by wave energy emissions. Such wave-particles are proposed because they can display both their wave state and their particle state at the same time. Thus we have alluded to the role of wave energy emissions from quantum particles to solve the two-slit mystery. Members were asked to contribute and to comment freely.

3) We have suggested that in order for some things to make sense, we have to rethink some consensus theories that have not yet lead to the solutions we seek. Therefore we have an expanded definition of space as in reply #42 that includes extending our Hubble view to the infinite space beyond, filled with the ISM as described by Wiki, along with light and gravitational wave emissions and absorptions, and a third wave concept that accounts for wave energy filling all space. Open for comments.

3) At the same time we addressed another mystery about the nature of light and gravitational wave energy that goes along with wave-particle duality, suggesting that light waves and gravitational waves are simultaneously emitted and absorbed by particles and objects, thus explaining the occurrences of wave convergences called high energy density “spots”, akin to virtual particles. The waves that are converging are coming and going in all directions at all points in space, at the speed of light, establishing the presence of an oscillating wave energy background that has a key role in the advance of light and gravity wave energy. It is predicted that the background is the result of a potentially infinite history of energy emissions and absorptions. Again, members were encouraged to comment.

4) We have pondered how space, time and energy could have had a beginning, aside from “something from nothing” and we have offered another alternative. We suggested that there were preconditions to our Big Bang, and those include the convergence of two or more parent big bang arenas, with each big bang arena convergence leading to a new big bang. That means there is a possibility that there was no beginning at all, because everything has always existed. As always, discussion was encouraged.

5) We have contemplated the observations of the red shift, the observed interstellar medium, including neutrinos, wave energy in the form of the cosmic microwave background, and the observed separation of galaxies and galactic structure, and have proposed the three infinites of space, time, and wave energy. Comments were welcomed.

So there are possibilities and alternatives, all within one greater universe, a multiple big bang landscape, that features individual finite expanding arenas, convergences, new big bangs, the three infinities of space, time, and energy, and the defeat of entropy by way of the perpetual process of arena action; there is much to think about as we set the stage for the conditions that provide the path to the mechanics that account for quantum gravity.

Following that path is being addressed in a step by step fashion, and we are presenting the steps in a logical sequence in hopes they can be seen to build on each other. But it is a long path of speculative answers to “as yet” unknowns, and the real event going on here is a call for participation in the process by offering ideas, and by addressing ideas that are put up for discussion. Feel free to take a stand for or against any of the steps discussed, and any additional quantum thinking is in order.

,,, and since it is uncontested (lol) that the wave-particle structure does work nicely to explain the “mystery” of the single particle, two-slit experiments, even those that used delayed choice set ups like in this apparatus:

… then let’s incorporate that idea about the wave structure of the quantum high energy density spots within the core of our wave-particles, into our layman level explanation for QG.

Then, in regard to quantum gravity, we are saying that the individual quanta within the high energy density core of the wave particle are composed of the convergences of multiple gravitational waves from various directions that are disturbances in the medium of space, associated with the presence of a wave particle, and at the same time, those convergences have a striking similarity to the way we have described virtual particles:

Now with that all said, I can introduce the important concept of a time delay that occurs as the mechanics of quantum action plays out. To do so we go back to address the important post #48 by @Pesqueira. I’ll quote it in full:

A zero sum environment where the below the well threshold potential, equals a negative aspect, -0. This creates a substrata drop where the energetic less than potential vs greater potential is excluded, via a lack of potential barrier (my bold). The well bottom aspect of a -0 (no potential) creates the zero sum bottom line, a below the well bottom. The potential that exist is finite. This finite potential is dynamic, for the lack of a better term, it exist as aspects of the four fundamental forces of nature. It is a closed loop environment containing infinite growth probabilities. As a zero sum closed loop environment with infinite growth probabilities, it's attribute nature is expansive growth. However, expansive growth must rely on a mechanism that controls and governs growth so as to regulate it's potential, a seed of destruction, if you will (my bold).

So, what is quantum gravity? It may be easier to explain what quantum gravity does. Quantum gravity operates at the lowest level possible, it regulates every aspect/parameter of our physical and non-physical Universe. It regulates everything from the motion of the galaxies, to the shape of a star, to the growth of a flower, to the rules that govern light waves, to quantum rules that govern how quantum events alter each other to form new quantum events. In regulating growth, both as life and "non-life" growth as we know it, quantum gravity influences and regulates everything.

Quantum gravity as -0 potential creates boundaries for any and all potential. It creates a below the well bottom that attracts potential yet impedes and recycles it by means of release (also my bold). Quantum gravity is not dynamic. It is however as constant and unchanging as Light itself. The question then becomes what came first, Light or Quantum gravity? Both exhibit close to infinite existence. If Light can be thought of as motion in it rudimentary condition, Quantum gravity can be thought of as embodying Light, allowing it to illuminate. In other words, without Quantum gravity, photonic Light wouldn't illuminate. In conclusion, without Quantum gravity there would be no charge, no spin, and no fields, the parameters that encompass quantum and standard physics.

Note that I have bolded portions of Pesqueira’s reply #48 that I think can be addressed by the concept of a time delay in the rate that the sub-quantum wave energy fronts advance through the local space as the accumulation of a quantum of high energy wave peaks is reached.

“This creates a substrata drop where the energetic less than potential vs greater potential is excluded, via a lack of potential barrier.” …

… “As a zero sum closed loop environment with infinite growth probabilities, it's attribute nature is expansive growth. However, expansive growth must rely on a mechanism that controls and governs growth so as to regulate it's potential, a seed of destruction, if you will.”

“Quantum gravity as -0 potential creates boundaries for any and all potential. It creates a below the well bottom that attracts potential yet impedes and recycles it by means of release.”

Those bolded portions seem to imply that the phenomenon of wave convergence energy peaks that I introduce as being important to the mechanics of QG, don’t form peaks without the “below the well bottom (-0)” attribute of quantum gravity pointed out by Pesqueira, and thus will not be sufficient to allow an accumulation of energy at the point of convergence. I have tried to explain that the formation of the high energy peaks bring with it an increase in the local wave energy density that equates to the “below the well bottom (-0)” attribute of quantum gravity pointed out by Pesqueira,

By making that relationship between what Pesqueira is saying and what I am saying, I hope I have established the introduction of the concept of a time delay that addresses Pesqueira’s concerns.

To elaborate on the mechanics that I consider to be in play, the individual waves involved in the meaningful convergences all carry energy to that point of convergence from many directions. The amount of energy necessary to produce a quantum at that point in space requires multiple individual waves to converge, that each carry less than a quantum of energy, i.e., the individual waves are sub-quantum. When they converge, the energy that they each carry is consolidated at (delivered to) a point in space and that peak in energy density exists for an instant. That instant is represented by the combined energy of all of the converging wave fronts, which are then described as a single quantum in respect to the much greater total energy of the multi-quanta wave-particle. (The amount of energy in each individual quanta is governed by the local wave energy density environment, which I refer to as the gravitational wave energy density profile of the local space).

Pesqueira made the point that there is nothing there in that description to account for all of that wave energy to be any more meaningful at the consolidation point than at any other point, since the waves that are delivered to that point in space would just as quickly pass through that point as they would at any other point, and travel on; he alluded to the fact that there was nothing about a wave convergence that could account for the peaks of energy to be considered accumulative, if I read his thinking correctly.

I am saying that the time delay is an important point that accounts for why the converging waves don’t just as quickly pass through that space; there is a slight but meaningful “time delay” due to the elevated wave energy density at and around the location of each high energy density spot, and the effect of an elevated gravitational wave energy density is a time delay in the rate of the advance of wave energy through the medium of space. Waves travel at different velocities through space, relative to the local wave energy density of that space.

guest46746

Quantum physics provides variance in the mostly invariance closed GR system. When looking into possibilities no matter how improbable quantum provides the variance. So time delay requires a mechanism that supports the hiccup or disruption of normal flow. Sometimes this can be found in GR via alternative other than quantum., but a further investigation is needed to determine the GR hiccup in an invariance environment. This path points in quantum gravity's direction.

Quantum physics provides variance in the mostly invariance closed GR system. When looking into possibilities no matter how improbable quantum provides the variance. So time delay requires a mechanism that supports the hiccup or disruption of normal flow.

Yes, it requires a mechanism, and I introduced the mechanism that I propose to do the trick.

Quote

Sometimes this can be found in GR via alternative other than quantum, but a further investigation is needed to determine the GR hiccup in an invariance environment. This path points in quantum gravity's direction.

Yes, it does, because the EFEs are not compatible with quantum mechanics, and though GR and spacetime are sufficient for the macro level mathematics, they are not sufficient for quantum gravity.

Do I detect a hesitance to reject my premise that the slight but meaningful “time delay” is due to the elevated wave energy density at and around the location of each high energy density spot? My point is that the effect of an elevated gravitational wave energy density is a time delay in the rate of the advance of wave energy through the medium of space where the wave energy density is elevated. Waves travel at different velocities through space, relative to the local wave energy density of that space.

Reply #76I would like to mention at this point the topic of clocks, and the variable rate that they measure the passing of time, depending on the gravitational wave energy density profile of the local space that is hosting the presence of the clock. As the local gravitational wave energy density changes due to acceleration, or due to the changing proximity of massive objects, the gravitational wave energy density profile of the local space changes proportionately. That is why accelerated clocks slow down relative to clocks at rest, and that is why clocks at the top of the mountain run faster than clocks located at the base of the mountain.It has to do with the rate that wave-particles function in varying gravitational wave energy density environments. The rate that wave-particles function is governed by the local gravitational wave energy density. The density of the local environment affects the density of the high energy density spots within the dense core of the wave-particles, and the resulting change in density causes a change in the time delay, and that change is reflected in the rate that the clock functions, since the clock is composed of wave-particles.The human body serves as a clock in that regard, and will age more slowly when accelerated to relativistic velocities; hence, the traveling twin will not age as rapidly as the stay at home twin, lol.Comment freely.

Logged

Layman Science Enthusiast

guest46746

Can the macro draw an analogy from the micro? Ein sof draws an interesting correlation to the (Yah Weh)wave particle diagram. The randomness of the HEDSpots around the HDCore is acting as the variance in quantum gravity. E=hv where v as the frequency of radiation determines the randomness of HEDSpots pattern. This differs from your topological analogy of GR local gravity, but it's premise as a pictorial image is useful in visualizing quantum effects.

My visualization as to the clustering effects and the randomness of the HEDSpots around the HDcore invokes a 3D image of the Tetragrammaton! lol

As in your "Formation of a high density spot", the 3D tetragrammaton has a core concentration, and six separate linear directionalities that comprise the star. The linear directionalities correspond to your "multi-directional wave functions" surrounding the HDCore in the diagram. The HEDSpots pattern fall between the star's outer linear directionalities and its outer most circular boundary. However, I read the randomness, as not random, but as a function of the linear directionalities, or to your "multi-directional wave functions". As such the HEDSpots around the HDcore can be predicted to also fall in a pattern that appears to be random. lol. This pattern would be a function of a dynamic radiation = v, in the equation E=hv. The h constant would be the "multi-directional wave functions". lol

The delay in time could be attributed to the 3D nature imposed on a 2D construct. The effects of radiation on waves. lol. An additional component that is essential and must be visualized is the 3D aspects both models presented. The clustering of the "HEDSpots around the HDcore" must be a dynamic 3D representation, meaning that the model has spin and the random appearing HEDSpots fall into consolidated verifiable groupings. The difference in grouping counts could produce a barometer of the radiation v. The constant h couldnot be used as analogous to the location, top of the mountain or bottom of the mountain as offered. The difference in time delay could than be imagined as the exact same model E=hv, used in both location, viewed from two different distinct perspectives, reporting similar results with miniscule but very verifiable differences. H must remain constant, what is constant is the "multi-directional wave functions" which must equal h.

The dynamic effect of radiation on wave location causing time delay is a possibility, but the double slot wave particle experiment is essentially a 2D result for an experiment that uses E=hv, and uses v as a constant. The experiment works in a strictly controlled experiment. Vary the frequency of v and the results as to where and how the HEDSpots cluster would alter. lol

Yes it can, and the micro can be seen as an analogy for the macro, as well. That technique can be instrumental in the evolution of theory. For example, in a multiple big bang landscape of the greater universe, two or more big bang arena waves might converge to produce a big crunch that is the macro counterpart to the micro HEDspot, and an expanding big bang arena wave might emerge from the collapse/bang of big crunches. That can be thought of as an analogy of how the two tiny quantum waves I have talked about here, can converge to produce a high energy density spot, and that spot could immediately expand and converge with adjacent expanding quantum waves; the macro is analogous to the micro and visa-versa.

Quote

Ein sof draws an interesting correlation to the (Yah Weh)wave particle diagram. The randomness of the HEDSpots around the HDCore is acting as the variance in quantum gravity. E=hv where v as the frequency of radiation determines the randomness of HEDSpots pattern. This differs from your topological analogy of GR local gravity, but it's premise as a pictorial image is useful in visualizing quantum effects.

I appreciate your perspective on “E=hv” that defines the “quantum of action” Planck’s constant, which is generally accepted science. However, some of the research into the quantum mechanics of black body radiation, for example, leads to concepts of sub-quanta levels of energy/action that build up to the quantum “packets” of energy that then equate to Planck’s constant, i.e., indicating a whole realm of sub-quantum action below the level of E=hv. It is in that realm that the mechanics of quantum gravity would have to be hosted.

Quote

My visualization as to the clustering effects and the randomness of the HEDSpots around the HDcore invokes a 3D image of the Tetragrammaton! lol

https://www.freeart.com/artwork/art-print/tetragrammaton-ineffable-name-of-god_fa10146712.htmlAs in your "Formation of a high density spot", the 3D tetragrammaton has a core concentration, and six separate linear directionalities that comprise the star. The linear directionalities correspond to your "multi-directional wave functions" surrounding the HDCore in the diagram. The HEDSpots pattern fall between the star's outer linear directionalities and its outer most circular boundary.

I don’t think I can get on board with you on that, lol.

Quote

However, I read the randomness, as not random, but as a function of the linear directionalities, or to your "multi-directional wave functions". As such the HEDSpots around the HDcore can be predicted to also fall in a pattern that appears to be random. lol. This pattern would be a function of a dynamic radiation = v, in the equation E=hv. The h constant would be the "multi-directional wave functions". lol

When a high energy density spot forms at the convergence of multiple wave fronts, it is surrounded by low energy density space of the parent wave fronts, and the action of the expansion of the HEDSpot is thought to be generally unrestrained back out into that space except for the time delay due to the relative high density, i.e., the expansion begins to trend to spherical until that expansion is interrupted by encountering an adjacent expanding HEDS wave (third wave as I have called them). If that is the case, then when I use the word “directional”, I am referring to the inflowing wave energy that is arriving at the point of convergence from adjacent quantum action. Therefore, “Multi-directional” might very well be restricted to some structural restraints, like lattice or matrix. It would depend on the exact type of wave particle, how many quanta are in the high density core (which governs the wave-particle’s frequency), its atomic structural components, and the local gravitational wave energy density profile of space, I would imagine.

Quote

The delay in time could be attributed to the 3D nature imposed on a 2D construct. The effects of radiation on waves. lol.

I would agree that there could be a “radiation” related effect on the mechanics that lead to the of the “spherical” trending of the wave that emerges from the convergences, but I would have a lot of difficulty imagining a meaningful 2-D construct that consisted of anything more than a geometrical slice of the 3-D action.

Quote

An additional component that is essential and must be visualized is the 3D aspects both models presented. The clustering of the "HEDSpots around the HDcore" must be a dynamic 3D representation, meaning that the model has spin and the random appearing HEDSpots fall into consolidated verifiable groupings. The difference in grouping counts could produce a barometer of the radiation v.

Very good. The orientation of the high energy density spots in the core of the wave particle could be persistent, thus assuring the persistence of the spin axis of a wave-particle that shows up in consecutive measurements.

Quote

The constant h couldnot be used as analogous to the location, top of the mountain or bottom of the mountain as offered. The difference in time delay could than be imagined as the exact same model E=hv, used in both location, viewed from two different distinct perspectives, reporting similar results with miniscule but very verifiable differences. H must remain constant, what is constant is the "multi-directional wave functions" which must equal h.

I may not fully understand the point you are making, and so please feel free to come back on it. The difference between the environment at the top of the mountain and the bottom of the mountain in the “clock” scenario is simply the strength of the gravitational force between those two locations. I am saying that there is a direct correlation between the gravitational wave energy density and the time delay. In higher density environments, the time delay is greater.

Quote

The dynamic effect of radiation on wave location causing time delay is a possibility, but the double slot wave particle experiment is essentially a 2D result for an experiment that uses E=hv, and uses v as a constant. The experiment works in a strictly controlled experiment. Vary the frequency of v and the results as to where and how the HEDSpots cluster would alter. lol

Yes, there are important controls on the nature of the light and the particulars of the apparatuses used. The key point in all of the delayed choice experiments is that a path to the detector from both slits is required, or no interference pattern can occur.

guest46746

I look at the double slit experiment as a parlor trick, I leave those that disagree to their own opinion. I'm not into trying to change minds. lol

On another related topic, delayed time. Quantum theory reports entangled particles as engaging instantaneously over distance, acting as a single particle in two separate locations. QT also accepts that two or more particle fields can occupy the same time space location. These two positions share the attribute of particles simutaneously sharing multiple perspectives of time space in different formats. lol. Time delay represents a perspective of slowing time or time elongation. It's a perspective where time can be stretched, just as a light particle is stretched at the speed of light, but time carries no fermion or bosonic value. So, what does Quantum theory not address? Quantum time. lol

As evident in entangled particles or particles sharing the same space/time location, a sense of time is absent. Being that time is non-existant in quantum it implies that any quantum argument used to explain time delay is invalid. Therefore, the only cogent argument for explaining time delay falls strictly under the principles of Einstein's relativity.

Therefore, E=hv is the overriding principle and must be applied in the double slit experiments. lol